MSE News: Single parents sent 'threatening' letters demanding proof they live alone

FBaby

Does it say "please send us proof you live alone" or does it say, for example, "please send us your most recent gas bill"?

The article quotes:

Both types of letter give recipients 30 days to respond with the required information, such as bank statements, utility bills, solicitor and benefit entitlement letters. If people don't respond, the letter says their tax credits will stop.

So I read that they are specific about what they want rather than a random 'just prove you're not guilty' letter.

Teresa60

Colin_Hunt wrote: »

Crikey, how much do you owe ?

If they decide not to give me back tax credits, it will be over £5000, which I cant afford.
Also my husband hs not come back, he is living abroad now.
Really struggling. Would be better off leaving my job.

gardenia101

dori2o wrote: »

.....It's a very good reason why people should check that their credit reports are up to date and show the correct data, including data on any financial links between people. This is the single biggest cause of people being checked regarding their living arrangements. If you are single but have a joint financial comittment, possibly from a prior relationship/marriage, then if this link is still present on the credit reference agencies files this could be interpreted as a potential case of someone making a false single persons claim, or possible failing to notify of a change in circumstances.....

I've been living alone (apart from 2 kids) for almost 9 years since ex husband left. I paid off my mortgage, which he'd been a guarantor on since I was s/e, a few years ago but it didn't occur to me that we'd still be linked on our credit files. I assumed the mortgage would just "disappear" from my file, which it did but my ex was still listed.

Wasn't a problem getting him off my file, but it may catch other genuine single parents out, so do check your files & others have suggested.

restless6 wrote: »

I am a single working parent and receive tax credits.

I wouldn't be worried about being asked to prove i live alone, because i do live alone, apart from my children of course.

It is surely only a problem for someone who has been telling porkies?

I agree in principle, but it may not be that easy to prove you do. I also don't feel its right to send these letters when their systems can't always cope with people then ringing to update claims.

My personal worry is that I require letters to be sent to me in large print as I'm partially sighted. HMRC (& others) have proven time & time again that they're unable to do this within any reasonable time scale - my TC renewal pack finally gets to me weeks after the return deadline, so I always have to beg for an extension (& last year, an extension to the extension :rotfl:). Award notices usually take an 10 - 12 weeks to get to me (no idea what I'd do if something was wrong as I'd be way out of the 30 day deadline for making corrections.)

I have no faith in HMRC getting such a letter to me within that 30 day deadline - so the first I'd know about it could be when my TC stop. Hopefully I won't be one of the single parents targeted since my working hours can be checked via PAYE & there's now nobody associated with me on my credit report....

LydiaJ

I had a similar sort of letter a few years ago when my husband died. We were separated, and I was claiming tax credits as a single parent. When he died, according to his pension scheme (NHS) I was paid his salary for six months after the death, before moving onto a widow's pension. When I sent in my tax credits claim, I included this money in the section about pensions rather than the section about earnings, naturally, because I hadn't earned it. However, because it was paid to me by the payroll department at the hospital where he had worked, HMRC's computer thought it was earnings, and that I had therefore fraudulently under-reported how much I'd earned, so they checked up on me. I don't have a problem with them looking into it, and I was easily able to explain things to their satisfaction, but I did find the tone and wording of their letter very threatening and scary. There was nothing along the lines of "there are some discrepancies that we need you to explain", just "we believe you're committing fraud so we're out to get you unless you can prove otherwise" kind of atmosphere to it.

carmina_piranha

dori2o wrote: »

It's so very easy t get caught up in this.

A case I dealt with before Christmas was a single woman with 2 children, she was living alone but had allowed her boyfriend to use her address for certain things such as a catalogue.

It automatically puts this person into a link with the single parent. The account may not have been in joint names but now the CRA has a record that this person has a financial product from this address.

It's that simple.

In this case the boyfriend was able to provide bank statements and his driving licence to show he was living elsewhere and only using the address for convenience (he didn't want his parents to know about the catalogue apparently).

When he applied for the catalogue, didn't the credit check say that he wasn't on the electoral roll?

pollyw65

I am a working single parent and receive a small amount of Child Tax Credit.I received one of these letters on the 17th January.
I have absolutely no objection to checks being made regarding the validity of claims. However, the letter I received stated they had evidence I was living with another adult and should be making a joint claim.
I have lived alone with my two children for 11 years. My current address was a new build when I moved in a year ago and there is no financial association with anyone.
No one else is on the Electoral Register and I have checked reports with Credit Reference Agencies.
Neither Concentrix or Tax Credits have been helpful when I have contacted them and neither are able to tell me what evidence they have.
As I know I am living alone it is concerning to say the least that there may be evidence to the contrary.
I have been asked to provide them with a vast amount of financial information for the last year. I agree that if there is nothing to hide then there is nothing to worry about however as said by others previously this financial information does not necessarily prove I am living alone.
I feel that if they are going to send such a strongly worded letter and request such a vast amount of financial information then the evidence they have should be shared.
Even although I know I am living alone this has caused a great deal of stress and worry!

pinkypoopydoo

Cate1976 wrote: »

I can think of a few scenarios where a single parent is still financially linked to their ex or living with opposite gender for legitimate reasons:

Joint mortgage and neither can afford to pay it on their own so both names still on it.

I had this problem with my tax credit claim last year - I phoned immediately, and gave them my ex-husbands new address(es - he had moved twice since we split), and they were able to quickly verify that he was on the electoral role for both addresses, and that he had been removed from the role for the marital home. It was sorted within around 90 minutes.

However, any kind of official letter is utterly terrifying, and to have the seed of an idea that someone has gone behind your back and reported you for lying to HMRC is deeply unsettling, even if you have nothing to hide. Letters from HMRC/Concentrix need to be clear - if it's a check because they have evidence of financial ties, then it needs to say exactly that. If it's a random check, then it needs to say that it's a random check.

dori2o

These people who are suggesting that HMRC should give more details in the letters, or on the phone, tell them if someone has reported them, what evidence they have etc need to remember that HMRC may have to build a case against this individual, therefore they are unable to give too much information in case the person who is committing fraud is able to clear away that evidence and thus clear their name.

It's the same a s someone who is arrested for comitting a crime, the interview techniques used by the police very rarely give away the main details of the evidence that they have against that person in case they are able to contaminate that line of enquiry.

It's basic techniques designed to ensure that those who are committing fraud are unable to contaminate the evidence held against them.

Kesstra

These people are not criminals and liking it to someone who is under police interview is entirely different and wrong. At least someone under police interview has a right to a solicitor!
I don't claim, I don't have children. I think most people understand the need for proof over the years but that isn't the issue. The issue is suddenly sending threatening letters, then not having the phone system and computer system set up, giving people 30 days only in order to send *proof* and generally treating all claimants as scroungers under default of guilt.

For example having moved last year and needing to re register under the new voting register, it has taken 9 months, many ridiculous threatening letters from the council, despite sending the ID we did have (partner doesn't drive or have a passport and because we had recently moved didn't have bills with our two names on.
You can be firm without resorting to low unintelligent threats and understand the fact many people DO send in paperwork but the excuse the DWP/HMRC/Council go to is " it's lost in the post" or "you never sent it"

Countless forms back and forth and it's only just been sorted. I still haven't got the forms for opting out of the open register.

Put it this way, I learnt after many years of dealing with arbitrary attitudes that to follow the rules you need to cover yourself silly.
Ie send ALL documents recorded delivery, proof of postage, given in person and obtained a signed receipt from whatever office and ignore the threatening attitude. Just take it seriously, get the items sent in and don't assume it will go smoothly because you played by the rules.

This terrible attitude this country now has, that anyone in work or not.. dares to claim benefits or in work help, should be by default a criminal.
I have NEVER met anyone who does not agree with following rules in order to claim, but they do not agree with the terrible attitude problem many staff in these offices have.

As I said, you can be firm without resorting to treating everyone like a guilty criminal. You can in fact get what you want, what you need and what is required by the rules, without resorting to bully boy letters out of the blue.

If letters were sent out every 12 months or so with general firm wording people wouldn't have a problem with it. To send a bully boy letter demanding people send all sorts paperwork in 30 days without having the phones and computer ready will of course frighten people and paperwork will get missed by default and by default it's the claimant's "fault"

How have we become such a nation of nasty people, when we essentially judge as guilty by default and therefore punish them for playing by the rules in the first place.
I came onto comment purely on the fact it's no surprise as usual the barf spew vomit of hate on here towards anyone daring to claim a penny and wanted to tell the decent people here to never come here again.
Rapists and !!!!!philes are treated better than a human being daring to need some financial help from the state.

FBaby

I agree that if there is nothing to hide then there is nothing to worry about however as said by others previously this financial information does not necessarily prove I am living alone.

But it should prove that you are paying for all your bills, receiving maintenance for your kids (if applicable) and more or less have the spending of someone living alone with kids. They are experienced in picking up any anomalities.

I expect the vast majority of cases that triggered letters will be dismissed as soon as they get the information. A quick look at it and they will be satisfied it is genuine. What they are interested in are those that ignore the letter (the guilty ones who think that if they ignore it it will go away) and those who come up with significant anomalities.